Jump to content

Wow to the new demo!


Recommended Posts

... CM:SF came about because many people expressed the desire to play something other than WW2. The continued very strong sales of CM:SF prove that modern warfare has a strong audience in general and that CM:SF is a good fit for many specifically. Which is why we will continue to do modern stuff long into the future.

Steve

My understanding of why you switched to modern was that you were tired of making WW2 (I think you've said this before). That was good enough for me even though I knew/know nothing about modern (everything I think I know about WW2 is a result of playing CMx1 and reading these forums). So I was quite skeptical when you announced CMSF, but that didn't stop me from pre-ordering 2 copies.

You know what happened next, so I put the game down and waited because I knew you would fix it... and you have fixed it and more, and in the process you justified my faith in BF.

What surprises me is how much I love the modern game. I no longer feel the void of having CMx1 not working (Vista) and having CMSF be, for me, unplayable. Instead I have pbem battles that rival, if not surpass, my nostalgic memories of CMx1 pbem battles past.

While I'm looking forward to Normandy, I'm not feeling as though I need it for my CM itch to be scratched. This leads me to believe that you have not only changed the game but you have changed this gamer as well. I thank you for that...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I have played CM since the Riesberg beta. After 10 pbem of CMSF I can say that is the best wargame experience I had till now.

Also, the usual criticism against modern syria setting is, that the forces are not balanced. But for me, I feel, it gives more possibilities to play a satisfactory game between unequal opponents. With blue also a noob can give some grog a challenge.

WW2 will all be nice, but modern is more interesting for me because it's new and more to discover.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My understanding of why you switched to modern was that you were tired of making WW2 (I think you've said this before).

Yup, very true. It was also the sensible way to approach making the engine because modern warfare features can be dumbed down to make WW2 features quite easily. It is harder to do it in reverse.

But if we didn't think there was enough people interested in modern warfare we would have not made CM:SF. Contrary to continued disinformation out there, we never made CM:SF on the off chance of the military wanting to pick it up. That would be like going out and buying a house, a new car, and all the consumer products you can think of then buying a lottery ticket to pay for it all :D

That was good enough for me even though I knew/know nothing about modern (everything I think I know about WW2 is a result of playing CMx1 and reading these forums). So I was quite skeptical when you announced CMSF, but that didn't stop me from pre-ordering 2 copies.

You know what happened next, so I put the game down and waited because I knew you would fix it... and you have fixed it and more, and in the process you justified my faith in BF.

You are the poster child of "loyal customer" :) We asked for patience and you gave it to us. We repaid that patience with a lot of hard work to get CM:SF into the shape it should have been when you bought it. And we did NOT charge anything for that work, like releasing it as "CM:SF Gold" like some other wargame companies might have :)

What surprises me is how much I love the modern game. I no longer feel the void of having CMx1 not working (Vista) and having CMSF be, for me, unplayable. Instead I have pbem battles that rival, if not surpass, my nostalgic memories of CMx1 pbem battles past.

I also have to admit that I was surprised by how much I fell in love with modern warfare. When I started in on it the feeling was much more intellectual curiosity than anything else. After I started playing I found that modern was really quite fun and tactically engaging.

While I'm looking forward to Normandy, I'm not feeling as though I need it for my CM itch to be scratched. This leads me to believe that you have not only changed the game but you have changed this gamer as well. I thank you for that...

The good news is that you can scratch even if you don't itch :D

I have played CM since the Riesberg beta. After 10 pbem of CMSF I can say that is the best wargame experience I had till now.

Also, the usual criticism against modern syria setting is, that the forces are not balanced. But for me, I feel, it gives more possibilities to play a satisfactory game between unequal opponents. With blue also a noob can give some grog a challenge.

WW2 will all be nice, but modern is more interesting for me because it's new and more to discover.

Thanks! Yes, this is exactly why we will continue to make new Modern era wargames. The interest in it is very solid and large enough to keep catering to. Thankfully the CMx2 game engine was designed to handle more than one thing at a time!

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the biggest mistake with CMSF was that QB on small maps are 'broken'. That is the main modus to play if one just wants to start simple and try out the toys. And it's also a pain in the editor to pick just this and this exact type of weapon and put it on the map to try it out. That has made the first step of the learning curve unnecessary high. And I think that is also one reason for the WW2 enthusiasm. They all want to play CMx2 but they have to start at "0" with the modern setting. And that is exactly is not very easy with CMSF, because you can't really train against the AI in a FAST way. I really think small QB against AI is the most played modus of CMSF. And it is exactly the modus where the disadvantage of red comes most trough (maybe not on stuffed urban).

With only UnCon Mercs/Militias for both sides you can even simulate low tech (lateWW2like) battles. Recoilless Technicals are the modern poor man tanks. There is very much depth in CMSF. It's just not so easy to discover.

For new WW2 QB system you battlefront guys should make sure that small QB with many random settings generate very good balanced results. You could also make a 'sandbox'-mode for the editor:

All units in the game can be picket freely from the list, placed on a map and then played against a simple CMx1 flag AI without After Action Report and Winer/Looser.

That should win the hearts of newcomers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Airplane!" was based on "Zero Hour" not Airport 79.

Wow!! I learned something new today ;) I figured it was Airport 79 because it came out in 1980 and was so clearly tearing on the Airport movies (including a close parody of the name). However, I guess the Airport movies were a rip-off of Zero Hour. But I checked IMDB and whadda know... OM is right!

And don't call me Shirley.

Steve

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have no retail deals that involve simultaneous release. We tried that twice, first time worked and second time didn't. I honestly doubt we'll do a simultaneous release again. It's not just about us having to work to someone else's release date (no matter how reasonable it seems to us when we sign), but it also has to do with cannibalization of sales, added complications for support, and customer confusion. With PC retail markets imploded the cost:benefit ratio has swung in the wrong direction.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One supposes having a small minority perpetually upset is a compliment.

For F's sake guys. Is GS and its opinions that worth all the fuss?

I happen to agree and disagree with a lot of what everyones saying about certain elements out there that only want to trash the game.

However I have found that a lot of guys at GS actually know what they are talking about game mechanics wise. Also, they are talking CMSF at a CM forum and interestingly can discuss a lot of thing that would be considered negative here and locked, but at GS, because its not owned by BF, they can discuss.

Theres a real lot of guys here that saw no wrong with a game that came out 2 years ago. Theres a few guys at GS who still trash it.

Somewhere in between lie all the other guys who just like it as a good little wargame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Snip

That's too funny; you are showing your colours here. :) Try standing back a few feet and be a little objective. I just went and browsed the latest 'topics' there, guess what? It just confirms what Nicdain said above, the same people grinding the same gears, ad nauseam.

At the risk of fanning the flames, I'm reading some of that stuff and think it would be perfect satire if they weren't so serious! :) I am reminded of the scene in Full Metal Jacket where the Sgt. confronts the psycho in the washroom - "What's your problem boy! Didn't your Momma love you enough?" Or some such :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's too funny; you are showing your colours here. :) Try standing back a few feet and be a little objective. I just went and browsed the latest 'topics' there, guess what? It just confirms what Nicdain said above, the same people grinding the same gears, ad nauseam.

At the risk of fanning the flames, I'm reading some of that stuff and think it would be perfect satire if they weren't so serious! :) I am reminded of the scene in Full Metal Jacket where the Sgt. confronts the psycho in the washroom - "What's your problem boy! Didn't your Momma love you enough?" Or some such :)

na mate, its not about colours at all. Im in no ones camp here, some people are far to quick to label people. All im saying is that theres an inbetween where most of us lie.

Have I discussed CMSF negatively, I certainly have. Have I discussed it positively, yep that too. Ive seen it happen all too often that a few guys are dismissed as malcontent's or miscreants just because they dont follow 'the party line' of another site.

On a CM discussion forum not owned by the company that makes the games I would expect guys to voice opinions that vary wildly from the norm here. And if this includes some that you dont personally agree with, then thats your problem and not mine.

So please dont try and label me as showing any colours here just because I may think a little differently from you do.

Cheers.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with GS is that its most active posters are the ones who have shown little interest in being objective. Or tolerant, or respectful, or humble, or pretty much anything necessary for having a reasonable discussion. The majority of people who do posses those qualities figure that out and don't participate. Which means it become a forum of mostly disaffected, axe grinders who value their personal agendas/vendettas over all else.

The primary problem with axe grinders is that they purposefully try to maintain the spotlight by cajoling, ridiculing, and brow beating people who (rightly) want the stage to be shared. Without moderation against such behavior it goes from bad to worse. The last time I was there was because someone here directed me to watch the usual suspects flame a new member for daring to be objective, though still critical of CM:SF. Some people even said "nice way to treat the new guy", but the damage was already done and I doubt the guy came back.

Believe it or not, if a person is told that there is a nugget of gold at the bottom of a pit of raw sewage they likely will decline to dive in on the off chance they might find it. That's why axe grinders are harmful. Especially axe grinders who deliberately misinform or mislead due to self-imposed ignorance. It's not just places like GS that this is true. Just look at the healthcare debate in the US for evidence of what axe grinders with agendas can do to the quality of the discussion.

I personally choose not to visit GS any more because there isn't anything there worth suffering through that I can't read here without having to suffer. It isn't worth squandering my limited time on this Earth sorting through to find something I probably would have seen here anyway. Especially because they use this Forum as a basis of their discussion topics more often than not.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I grew up in the cold war era. Dad was on alert for possible invasion of Cuba during the missiles of October crisis. Of course I was too young to be bothered with such trivial matters at the time, thankfully. I never lost sleep over the possibility that the world as we knew it came so close to being blown to bits. Not until much later at least..

Anyway, for future "modern" games, I certainly hope BFC will take a look at the cold war. I think many of your customers grew up as I did during those times.

ps. I'm mainly a WW2 enthusiast, so bring on the 101st Airborne and Normandy! :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GSX,

Have I discussed CMSF negatively, I certainly have. Have I discussed it positively, yep that too. Ive seen it happen all too often that a few guys are dismissed as malcontent's or miscreants just because they dont follow 'the party line' of another site.

I don't label rational critics "malcontents" or "miscreants". I save those labels for people who do things who show very little concern for facts, respect, civility, or even self respect. Whatever possible positive contribution they may theoretically be capable of making is obscured by their actual behavior. You can label them however you like, but the fact remains that they have nothing positive to offer a rational discussion because, inherently, they aren't interested in a rational discussion. In fact, they actively seek to shut it down.

On a CM discussion forum not owned by the company that makes the games I would expect guys to voice opinions that vary wildly from the norm here. And if this includes some that you dont personally agree with, then thats your problem and not mine.

Again, the content isn't as much of a problem as it is the means of delivering it. However, on GS I've seen a lot of deliberate factual misrepresentations in order to support a preconceived point of view which is not subject to rational challenge. Such writings have zero value except to continue to stroke the egos posting them.

Now, is everybody over on GS as I describe above? No, certainly not. But the proportion of extreme axe grinders to rational posters is extremely lopsided. I also have only rarely seen anybody stand up to their bullying tactics. And that will likely continue because it's a self fulfilling, self reinforcing exercise. Just like we make irrational posters feel unwelcome here, the clique over at GS are determined to make rational posters feel unwelcome. Personally, I'm fine with that because I have the option to not read GS and the authority to ensure that this Forum is an inviting place for rational people to discuss, and criticize, our products.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with GS is that its most active posters are the ones who have shown little interest in being objective. Or tolerant, or respectful, or humble, or pretty much anything necessary for having a reasonable discussion. The majority of people who do posses those qualities figure that out and don't participate. Which means it become a forum of mostly disaffected, axe grinders who value their personal agendas/vendettas over all else.

The primary problem with axe grinders is that they purposefully try to maintain the spotlight by cajoling, ridiculing, and brow beating people who (rightly) want the stage to be shared. Without moderation against such behavior it goes from bad to worse. The last time I was there was because someone here directed me to watch the usual suspects flame a new member for daring to be objective, though still critical of CM:SF. Some people even said "nice way to treat the new guy", but the damage was already done and I doubt the guy came back.

Believe it or not, if a person is told that there is a nugget of gold at the bottom of a pit of raw sewage they likely will decline to dive in on the off chance they might find it. That's why axe grinders are harmful. Especially axe grinders who deliberately misinform or mislead due to self-imposed ignorance. It's not just places like GS that this is true. Just look at the healthcare debate in the US for evidence of what axe grinders with agendas can do to the quality of the discussion.

I personally choose not to visit GS any more because there isn't anything there worth suffering through that I can't read here without having to suffer. It isn't worth squandering my limited time on this Earth sorting through to find something I probably would have seen here anyway. Especially because they use this Forum as a basis of their discussion topics more often than not.

Steve

And here we go again. labelling guys as axe grinders etc just because they dont agree with you or your personal agenda.

Now I agree that there are 1 perhaps 2 posters there that are truly disaffected for some reason or other, but the majority are as objective, and even perhaps more objective than a heck of a lot of the posters here.

Of course, you wouldnt know this as you havent visited the site since Feb 09 and of course this means that you havent a clue what actually gets discussed over there. No matter though as Im sure that not one thing that is ever discussed over there affects anything that happens here, and so why care either way.

But I definitely and absolutely dont agree with labelling anyone who ever posts at GS as disaffected maniacs who are plotting the destruction of BF and all it stands for.

Its been said far too many times, its only a bloody game. Although I do understand that for you its your living but less than 20 posters on a very obscure site at the arse end of the web shouldn't bother anyone here beyond being mildly interested in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now I agree that there are 1 perhaps 2 posters there that are truly disaffected for some reason or other

Actually, this is pretty much correct. Funny that we come up with the same headcount!

I would say that it was much worse when Steve (apparently) still read the forum.

In any case, do not waste your energy on this discussion, guys!

Best regards,

Thomm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I had a look at the GS forums and was quite interested to see what people where discussing. I would say that although the tone is less positive than over here, people were not really saying much I would call unresonable. They just seem to be going over the same arguements alot.

I think that the people over there would do well to pay closer attention to what is happening over here (for themselves, rather than updates from GSX) because a couple of people seem to have the wrong end of the stick. However, many do have some good points that I (maybe not Steve :)) agree with - even if they put them across quite strongly!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And here we go again. labelling guys as axe grinders etc just because they dont agree with you or your personal agenda.

Now I agree that there are 1 perhaps 2 posters there that are truly disaffected for some reason or other, but the majority are as objective, and even perhaps more objective than a heck of a lot of the posters here.

Of course, you wouldnt know this as you havent visited the site since Feb 09 and of course this means that you havent a clue what actually gets discussed over there. No matter though as Im sure that not one thing that is ever discussed over there affects anything that happens here, and so why care either way.

But I definitely and absolutely dont agree with labelling anyone who ever posts at GS as disaffected maniacs who are plotting the destruction of BF and all it stands for.

Its been said far too many times, its only a bloody game. Although I do understand that for you its your living but less than 20 posters on a very obscure site at the arse end of the web shouldn't bother anyone here beyond being mildly interested in it.

I have to admit I don't understand where you are coming from here. It's like you have blinders on or something, nobody is doing what you are claiming. It seems to me your response has very little to do with what Steve wrote in your quote - read it again? It really comes across like you are labelling and have an agenda. I don't know Steve apart from these boards, but at this point and time I can't help but feel sympathy for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to admit I don't understand where you are coming from here. It's like you have blinders on or something, nobody is doing what you are claiming. It seems to me your response has very little to do with what Steve wrote in your quote - read it again? It really comes across like you are labelling and have an agenda. I don't know Steve apart from these boards, but at this point and time I can't help but feel sympathy for him.

Did you forget a smilie here? Just a couple of posts ago you put labels and movie references on a whole forum, and now you suddenly don't understand where GSX is coming from?

Are you like 90 years old or something? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you forget a smilie here? Just a couple of posts ago you put labels and movie references on a whole forum, and now you suddenly don't understand where GSX is coming from?

Are you like 90 years old or something? :D

I did? Rereading what I wrote and... nope didn't. Communication is funny I guess. A smilie for you :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to admit I don't understand where you are coming from here. It's like you have blinders on or something, nobody is doing what you are claiming. It seems to me your response has very little to do with what Steve wrote in your quote - read it again? It really comes across like you are labelling and have an agenda. I don't know Steve apart from these boards, but at this point and time I can't help but feel sympathy for him.

Its simple really. Every few months someone mentions that certain posters at GS are being a bit negative. Someone here then tars all of GS with the same brush that its a CMSF negative site populated by doomsayers and those that want to see BF sink into the sea. All Im trying to counter this with is that this simply isnt true and yes I agree that 1 or 2 might be like that but not the majority.

I have no agenda here other than putting a wee bit perspective on it all and in actuality the way some guys here react to this trivia is actually reinforcing what a few GS posters have stated in the past.

GS means absolutely nothing to BF and so I think Steve is quite right to ignore it and have not visited for the last 7 months. Its only a forum......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...